17 minute learn
Animal Charity Evaluators’ Higher for Animals: Proof-Based mostly Insights for Efficient Animal Advocacy useful resource is an ongoing venture to distill key analysis on completely different animal advocacy interventions to assist us consider their influence in several contexts. We’ve made this analysis publicly out there to assist knowledgeable decision-making about easy methods to assist essentially the most animals. You could learn extra concerning the methodology in our current announcement, and entry ACE’s Higher For Animals useful resource.
It is a dwelling doc and we need to make it as useful and accessible as doable, so please be happy to attain out with suggestions! To maintain updated with ACE’s analysis and the work of the wonderful organizations that we assist, make sure to join our mailing record.
To assist make this data extra accessible to a variety of audiences, we are actually excited to launch a sequence of social media and weblog posts spotlighting one intervention every month. This month—for the primary version—we’re specializing in the proof round company outreach for welfare enhancements.
Intervention Highlight #1: Company Outreach for Welfare Enhancements
What is that this intervention?
This class refers to outreach or campaigns to encourage meals firms (e.g., retailers, producers, or eating places) to decide to enhancing animal welfare requirements all through their provide chains. In contrast to ‘farmer collaboration’, which includes straight partaking with farmers and producers to undertake higher practices on the bottom, this method targets the organizational insurance policies and commitments that drive provide chain modifications. This contains work similar to company dedication campaigns; outreach to certifier packages; and efforts to trace, encourage, and assist firms’ implementation of welfare commitments. A typical instance of company outreach is cage-free egg campaigns focused at retailers.
What’s our total evaluation of this intervention? How assured are we on this evaluation?
- Company outreach for welfare enhancements has a powerful monitor report of success, taking part in a vital position for a whole bunch of tens of millions of animals’ wellbeing. Nonetheless, reviews spotlight the necessity for considerate implementation and a deal with long-term technique if these efforts are to translate into sustained, systemic change.
- We discovered considerably much less proof for the producer outreach subcategory than for the influence of company outreach as a complete. We count on that is partly as a result of NGOs haven’t usually prioritized producer outreach, provided that producers are much less well-known to the general public and current fewer alternatives for public marketing campaign actions. Whereas we expect it’s doubtless that conducting outreach efforts to actors throughout the provision chain (not simply retailers) will considerably enhance the chance of securing new welfare commitments and guaranteeing their implementation, we had been unable to search out sturdy proof backing this up.
- General, we expect that company and institutional outreach for welfare enhancements seems to be a really promising intervention, as a result of relative wealth of proof for influence a minimum of within the shorter time period. It is a broad, preliminary evaluation and we count on the effectiveness of any intervention to differ considerably relying on the context and the method taken—see under for additional particulars.
- This intervention might be stronger the place/when:
- Retail market focus is excessive and companies compete on status.
- Advocates goal giant consumer-facing firms that care about their public status and have few or no prior animal welfare pledges.
- Public concern about animal welfare already exists.
- The welfare ask is straightforward, tangible, and auditable (e.g., cage-free).
- Producer focus is low (which means no small group of highly effective suppliers dominates the market) which limits their skill to coordinate and resist welfare enhancements.
- Gross sales run primarily via formal, auditable channels the place transactions will be tracked and welfare commitments independently verified.
- Per-capita consumption of the focused product is excessive and rising.
- Logistical or information limitations to implementation are low.
- Advocates have sturdy native relationships and cultural fluency.
- Conversely, the intervention is probably going weaker the place/when:
- Markets are fragmented or largely casual, making gross sales tough to trace and welfare pledges exhausting to confirm.
- A number of producers management most provide, permitting them to coordinate and resist change.
- The product enjoys political safety or strategic significance, giving it backing from authorities or state pursuits.
- Public, media, or institutional actors present fatigue after repeated welfare campaigns.
- Most high-profile, easy-to-target firms have already dedicated, leaving solely smaller or much less reputation-sensitive companies.
- The welfare ask is advanced or tough to audit, or implementation faces vital logistical limitations.
- Our confidence on this evaluation is reasonable. Whereas there’s a relative wealth of analysis on this intervention, it’s largely restricted to welfare enhancements for egg-laying hens in the USA (and, to a lesser extent, broiler chickens within the U.S. and each egg-laying hens and broiler chickens in Western Europe), and we stay unsure about its generalizability to different contexts. A few of our conclusions—notably concerning the circumstances that make campaigns roughly efficient—draw partly on theoretical reasoning and professional opinion quite than direct empirical proof. Additional analysis could be notably useful regarding the effectiveness of company outreach for welfare enhancements throughout a broader vary of animal teams and geographic areas.
What does the analysis say about how efficient this intervention is?
Impression on animals’ experiences
- There may be a lot uncertainty across the extent of optimistic and destructive wellbeing of egg-laying hens and broiler chickens all through their lifetime (together with how completely different types of bodily and psychological struggling evaluate to one another). Nonetheless, it seems extremely doubtless that transitioning to cage-free techniques (for laying hens) and Higher Rooster Dedication requirements (for broiler chickens) interprets to vital enhancements in wellbeing. Adverse impacts on wellbeing—similar to the upper fee of mortality in cage-free techniques, a minimum of whereas farmers develop accustomed to the transition, and the truth that slower-growing breeds of broiler rooster have longer lifespans and subsequently spend extra time in intensive farming circumstances—seem like considerably outweighed by the optimistic impacts, similar to larger freedom to maneuver and specific pure behaviors).1
- Likewise, it seems doubtless that transitioning sows out of gestation crates brings about vital internet enhancements to sows’ wellbeing.2
- Proof for the impacts of company outreach on different species is thinner. For fishes, for instance, researchers spotlight the significance of implementing sturdy gorgeous and slaughter strategies as an alternative choice to air asphyxiation, although the industrial efficiency {of electrical} gorgeous at present seems blended.3 For shrimps, teams are starting to safe company commitments for electrical gorgeous and eliminating the follow of eyestalk ablation, interventions anticipated to forestall giant quantities of acute struggling regardless that sturdy empirical information remains to be restricted.4
Brief-term impacts
- Progress on cage-free commitments:5
- As of September 2025, over 2,750 cage-free commitments for egg-laying hens have been made globally, and over half (1,400) of those have been carried out. That is thought of a significant contributor to the truth that 150 million fewer American, European, and British hens are caged at the moment than a decade in the past.6
- 2025 is a pivotal yr for company welfare commitments: Over 40% of all cage-free insurance policies had been made with a 2025 deadline.7 As issues stand, most firms aren’t reporting their progress towards assembly their commitments, and it appears doubtless that many won’t be met.8 As of September 2025, 1,116 cage-free commitments had been made with an end-of-year deadline. (These figures are expressed by way of variety of commitments quite than firms, as a single firm could make a number of commitments.) Of those, firms weren’t reporting some progress for 643 (58%) of them, reporting on progress for 298 (27%) of them, and reporting 175 (16%) of them as fulfilled.9
- Progress on broiler welfare commitments:
Lengthy-term impacts
- In the long run, the steadiness of proof signifies that company welfare reforms will be anticipated to drive up the prices of manufacturing animal merchandise, which can finally be borne both by customers or elsewhere within the provide chain. This may even—in precept—make the sector much less interesting for brand spanking new entrants (which could possibly be advantageous, however might additionally deliver the chance of elevated trade consolidation).15 Whereas demand for animal merchandise is taken into account comparatively value inelastic (i.e., customers cut back their purchases solely barely in response to cost will increase), rising the worth of animal merchandise does appear to lower consumption, although the proof is pretty restricted and such decreases seem slight.16 As such, in concept, elevating prices for the animal agriculture trade ought to make it much less worthwhile and sustainable, particularly provided that it already tends to function on very skinny revenue margins.17 This will additionally deliver dangers: If farmed animal welfare enhancements begin to make it tangibly more durable for customers to afford animal merchandise, public assist for such enhancements might wane. It might, subsequently, be essential for the motion to additionally assist efforts to make it simpler for customers to buy plant-based meals, similar to Denmark’s 2023 Motion Plan for Plant-Based mostly Meals.18)
- The out there empirical proof on the consequences of welfare reforms on public attitudes towards animal welfare means that such results are both negligible or barely optimistic—i.e., such reforms have a tendency to advertise pro-animal attitudes quite than promote complacency about animals’ present welfare requirements.19
- There are additionally different intuitive, although much less empirically-based, arguments for the sustained optimistic results of welfare reforms past their direct, short-term impacts. This contains their position in: sustaining public and media curiosity in animal welfare points; encouraging extra moral shopper selections (e.g., rising the chance that individuals buy increased welfare merchandise after studying about welfare points via public campaigns); and constructing the worldwide animal advocacy motion by uniting organizations behind frequent concrete targets, creating expertise in campaigning and negotiations, and driving a productive sense of morale and accomplishment.20
- It additionally appears doubtless that company campaigning might pave the way in which for helpful laws. This has been voiced by a number of leaders within the motion, similar to in a printed dialog between ACE and David Coman-Hidy, and was reiterated in newer discussions with exterior specialists. Cage-free state laws within the U.S. and the European Union’s earlier proposed laws banning cages have been cited as particular examples of this.21
- General, whereas we count on company outreach efforts to have vital long-term advantages, we expect this shouldn’t be assumed mechanically. In precept, optimistic modifications from company outreach efforts could possibly be fully offset by elevated public complacency, offering large animal agriculture trade gamers with optimistic PR, and diverting funding and assist from packages aimed toward extra elementary change. Organizations ought to severely take into account easy methods to handle such dangers and be able to adapt their approaches to finest match the precise context they’re working in.
Value effectiveness
- In line with varied quantitative cost-effectiveness estimates:
- A greenback spent on egg-laying hen campaigns might have an effect on 12–160 hen years,22 0.7 Incapacity-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs)23 or 1.7 Animal High quality-Adjusted Life Years (AQALYs).24
- A greenback spent on broiler rooster campaigns might have an effect on 0.2–90 rooster years25 or 4.6 AQALYs.26
- A greenback spent on electrical gorgeous advocacy for shrimps helps on common between 1,100 and a pair of,200 shrimps27 or 639 DALYs28.
- A greenback spent on future farmed fish company commitments for humane gorgeous previous to slaughter in France, Italy, and Spain may benefit between two and 36 animals.29 (Nonetheless, the precise welfare enhancements for every fish could possibly be thought of fairly minor given the brief length of slaughter, and newer proof means that present electrical gorgeous for some fish species could also be much less helpful than initially thought30.)
- A few of these estimates are more likely to already be outdated, and all of them are topic to appreciable uncertainty. For instance, Šimčikas highlights that his estimates are primarily based on historic campaigns and will not maintain for future campaigns.31 As famous above, there’s additionally a lot uncertainty across the long-term impacts of company outreach campaigns.
Power of proof
- There may be rather more proof relating to this intervention than most others we lined in our “Higher for Animals” venture. Most usefully, this contains qualitative reflections from campaigners and funders within the house, information of the quantity and standing of commitments secured, and informative (albeit nonetheless extremely unsure) cost-effectiveness estimates. Nonetheless, our confidence within the analysis is diminished by the next proof gaps:
- Most proof pertains on to the U.S. and Europe, which means we’re a lot much less sure concerning the applicability of company outreach efforts to different international locations, particularly these which might be considerably culturally distinct from the U.S. (for instance, the place there’s much less of a historical past of animal activism, or the place meals is essentially purchased in casual markets quite than from giant retailers).
- There may be a lot much less proof on the effectiveness of company outreach for animals apart from chickens.
- Proof about the fee effectiveness of previous company campaigns can’t be assumed to be indicative of the fee effectiveness of future campaigns. Whereas there’s some motive to imagine that future campaigns are more likely to be more economical (for instance, as a result of upfront prices have already been made in establishing animal welfare organizations to do that work and constructing experience and momentum round it), future campaigns is also much less value efficient (for instance, as a result of campaigns have already secured the simplest wins, and concentrating on different trade gamers, animal teams, or geographic areas could possibly be much less value efficient).
- There may be inevitably a lot much less proof on the long-term influence of such campaigns than on the short-term influence. Whereas on steadiness we expect it’s extra doubtless that campaigns can have a optimistic long-term influence total, there’s a vital threat that some company campaigns will find yourself harming extra animals in the long term by tacitly selling and/or rising the profitability of firms that make incremental welfare enhancements.
- There may be additionally potential for measurability bias, since company campaigns are among the many simpler advocacy interventions to trace and quantify. This implies their influence might seem bigger or extra sure in comparison with different interventions which might be more durable to measure, even when the true variations in effectiveness are smaller.
- We additionally discovered little or no proof referring to welfare outreach campaigns focused towards establishments (similar to colleges and hospitals), which doubtless displays restricted use of this method so far.
Beneath what circumstances is that this intervention roughly efficient?
- Based mostly on reviews from Animal Ask and Rethink Priorities, and conversations with exterior specialists, advocates count on company outreach to be notably cost-effective in contexts the place:32
- There’s a excessive stage of competitors between companies within the focused trade.
- Repute is essential to competitors.
- Retail market focus is reasonable‑to‑excessive (so persuading a handful of highly effective retailers covers a big share of gross sales).
- There are firms proclaiming values that they are often moderately proven to not uphold.
- The product doesn’t present vital advantages to a state or ruling social gathering.
- There are not any vital logistical or information limitations for producers to implement the welfare enchancment being sought (for instance, the mandatory gear, animal husbandry information, or provide of higher-welfare inputs is available).
- Producer focus is sufficiently low that they’re unable to coordinate to withstand strain from retailers.
- The general public, media, and key institutional actors aren’t but fatigued by repeated welfare asks. This ‘oversaturation threshold’ is more likely to differ relying on the area; for instance, the success of repeated company campaigns in Europe suggests the brink there could also be fairly excessive.
- The ‘low-hanging fruits’ amongst sectors and firms haven’t but been picked: I.e., the place there stay giant, model‑delicate firms with excessive market share and no (or few) prior commitments referring to animals the place there’s appreciable public concern.
- A excessive formal‑to‑casual market ratio means most gross sales circulation via auditable retail or meals‑service channels.
- There may be present public concern and a historical past of animal activism that has already laid motion foundations (e.g., media relationships, grassroots networks).
- Per‑capita consumption of the focused animal product is each excessive and projected to develop, so every win advantages many animals.
- There’s a particular, tangible ask that’s readily understood by the general public and key stakeholders. That is one motive why most company campaigns have targeted on cage-free commitments so far, and why some advocates are extra skeptical concerning the chance of many firms implementing the Higher Rooster Dedication, which is much less instantly tangible and easy to speak. Cage-free commitments may additionally be simpler to implement, provided that they depend upon the presence or absence of bodily infrastructure, whereas the Higher Rooster Dedication asks are much less seen.33
- The expertise and native information of the advocacy group are additionally essential: Expert negotiators with sturdy relationships and cultural fluency can safe commitments even in much less favorable market circumstances.34
Our priorities for enhancing this proof evaluation
- To enhance future iterations of this proof abstract, we plan to:
- Seek for extra proof on how related techniques will be, and have been, used for establishments in addition to firms.
- Discover the extent to which a provide of higher-welfare merchandise is a real bottleneck for retailers in several contexts.
- Discover the contexts during which producer outreach seems roughly efficient, together with evaluation of statistics exhibiting the implementation of welfare commitments made by producers particularly.
- Conduct a extra complete evaluation of the proof explicit to particular animal teams.
- Discover in additional element the robustness of the cost-effectiveness estimates that we cited.
- Embrace an evaluation of company-producer relationships, i.e., what drives producers to vary their requirements.
;
Final up to date September 16, 2025
-
See Welfare Footprint (n.d.) for laying hens and Welfare Footprint (n.d.) for broiler chickens; Khire and Ryba (2024)
-
For instance, see Farm Animal Welfare Committee (2015)
-
For up-to-date statistics on the quantity and standing of company welfare commitments, seek advice from:
- Cage-free commitments
- Broiler rooster welfare commitments
-
See for instance Mercy For Animals (2024); Ro (2025)
-
As these had been shared in confidence, we’re unable to share additional particulars.
-
See for instance Andreyeva et al. (2010), Font-i-Furnols (2023), and Sentience Institute (2020).
-
Ministry of Meals, Agriculture, and Fisheries of Denmark (2023
-
Harris et al. (2022); Anderson and Lenton (2019); Anthis (2020)
-
See for instance Cotra (2017). Suggestions from exterior specialists supported the validity of those arguments.
-
Animal Ask (2022); Cage Free Legal guidelines (n.d.), famous in suggestions from exterior specialists; Coman-Hidy (2017)
-
Rethink Priorities (n.d.). On this context, DALYs (Incapacity-Adjusted Life Years) signify years of wholesome life averted by struggling, adjusted for severity throughout species.
-
Grilo (2024). On this context, AQALYs signify years of life adjusted for his or her high quality, combining each the size of life and the diploma of wellbeing skilled throughout that point.
-
See, e.g., Saraiva et al. (2024) and Schuck-Paim et al. (2025)
-
Animal Ask (2023); Šimčikas (2019); unpublished conversations with trusted grantmakers on this house
-
This level was closely emphasised by a number of exterior specialists that we consulted.
ACE is devoted to making a world the place all animals can thrive, no matter their species. We take the
guesswork out of supporting animal advocacy by directing funds towards essentially the most impactful charities and packages,
primarily based on proof and analysis.
167
Recipients engaged on promising tasks
42
Nations throughout six continents.
$68M
Donations throughout the animal advocacy motion.
$58,000,000+
in donations already made to our advisable charities between January 2019 and March 2025
Seeking to make your first donation? We’re joyful to assist
